Comprehensive Stock Comparison
Compare Kimberly-Clark Corporation (KMB) vs Unilever PLC (UL) Stock
Analyze side-by-side fundamentals, valuation, growth, and profitability to decide which stock is the better buy.
Selected Stocks
Add up to 10 tickers. Use presets or search to get started.
Quick Verdict
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | UL | 1.9% revenue growth vs KMB's -14.2% |
| Value | KMB | Lower P/E (14.7x vs 19.6x) |
| Quality / Margins | KMB | 11.7% net margin vs UL's 10.2% |
| Stability / Safety | UL | Beta 0.03 vs KMB's 0.04, lower leverage |
| Dividends | KMB | 4.5% yield, 27-year raise streak, vs UL's 2.8% |
| Momentum (1Y) | UL | +35.3% vs KMB's -18.0% |
| Efficiency (ROA) | UL | 16.0% ROA vs KMB's 11.7%, ROIC 15.3% vs 23.2% |
Who Each Stock Is For
Income & stability
Growth exposure
Long-term compounding (10Y)
Sleep-well-at-night portfolio
Defensive / Recession hedge
Business Model
What each company does and how it makes money
Kimberly-Clark is a global manufacturer of personal care and consumer tissue products sold under well-known brands like Huggies, Kleenex, and Scott. It generates revenue primarily through three segments: Personal Care (~50% of sales), Consumer Tissue (~35%), and K-C Professional (~15%), selling to retailers, distributors, and commercial customers. The company's competitive advantage lies in its powerful portfolio of essential household brands with strong consumer loyalty and extensive global distribution networks.
Unilever is a global consumer goods giant selling everyday household and personal care products through a vast portfolio of trusted brands. It generates revenue primarily from three segments: Beauty & Personal Care (~40% of sales), Foods & Refreshment (~35%), and Home Care (~25%), with strong emerging markets exposure. Its competitive moat lies in its massive scale, extensive distribution network, and portfolio of iconic brands that command consumer loyalty across price points.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Financial Metrics Comparison
Side-by-side fundamentals across 2 stocks. BestLagging
Financial Scorecard
KMB leads in 3 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics, Profitability & Efficiency). UL leads in 2 (Total Returns, Risk & Volatility). 1 tied.
Financial Metrics (TTM)
UL is the larger business by revenue, generating $120.1B annually — 7.0x KMB's $17.2B. Profitability is closely matched — net margins range from 11.7% (KMB) to 10.2% (UL). On growth, UL holds the edge at -3.2% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | KMBKimberly-Clark Co… | ULUnilever PLC |
|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $17.2B | $120.1B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $3.3B | $21.7B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $2.0B | $12.2B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $2.4B | $14.5B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +35.6% | +71.3% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +14.5% | +15.8% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +11.7% | +10.2% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +13.8% | +12.1% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -17.2% | -3.2% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +11.9% | -3.4% |
Valuation Metrics
At 18.4x trailing earnings, KMB trades at a 33% valuation discount to UL's 27.3x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, KMB's 14.0x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than UL's 14.4x.
| Metric | KMBKimberly-Clark Co… | ULUnilever PLC |
|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $37.0B | $161.1B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $43.5B | $190.1B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 18.36x | 27.30x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 14.71x | 19.61x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 20.02x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 14.00x | 14.44x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 2.15x | 2.25x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 21.12x | 6.95x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 22.57x | 17.56x |
Profitability & Efficiency
KMB delivers a 115.0% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $115 in annual profit, vs $61 for UL. UL carries lower financial leverage with a 1.36x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to KMB's 4.08x.
| Metric | KMBKimberly-Clark Co… | ULUnilever PLC |
|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +115.0% | +61.2% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +11.7% | +16.0% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +23.2% | +15.3% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +25.3% | +17.7% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 4.08x | 1.36x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $6.5B | $24.5B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $688M | $6.1B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $7.2B | $30.7B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 9.73x | 20.96x |
Total Returns (with DRIP)
A $10,000 investment in UL five years ago would be worth $16,056 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $10,537 for KMB. Over the past 12 months, UL leads with a +35.3% total return vs KMB's -18.0%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors UL at 17.1% vs KMB's 0.3% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | KMBKimberly-Clark Co… | ULUnilever PLC |
|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +9.9% | +14.2% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -18.0% | +35.3% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +0.8% | +60.8% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +5.4% | +60.6% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +19.1% | +120.1% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +0.3% | +17.1% |
Risk & Volatility
UL is the less volatile stock with a 0.03 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than KMB's 0.04 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. UL currently trades 98.4% from its 52-week high vs KMB's 74.1% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | KMBKimberly-Clark Co… | ULUnilever PLC |
|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.04x | 0.03x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $150.45 | $74.98 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $96.26 | $56.20 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +74.1% | +98.4% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 66.5 | 61.8 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 5.0M | 2.7M |
Analyst Outlook
Wall Street rates KMB as "Hold" and UL as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 10.4% upside for KMB (target: $123) vs -11.1% for UL (target: $66). For income investors, KMB offers the higher dividend yield at 4.47% vs UL's 2.76%.
| Metric | KMBKimberly-Clark Co… | ULUnilever PLC |
|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $123.00 | $65.55 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 31 | 35 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +4.5% | +2.8% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 27 | 0 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $4.98 | $1.72 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.4% | +1.1% |
Historical Charts
Charts are rendered on first load. Hover for details.
Chart 1Total Return — 5 Years (Rebased to 100)
| Stock | Mar 20 | Feb 26 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Kimberly-Clark Corp… (KMB) | 100 | 70.52 | -29.5% |
| Unilever PLC (UL) | 100 | 123.18 | +23.2% |
Unilever PLC (UL) returned +61% over 5 years vs Kimberly-Clark Corp… (KMB)'s +5%. A $10,000 investment in UL 5 years ago would be worth $16,056 today (including dividends reinvested).
Chart 2Revenue Growth — 10 Years
| Stock | 2016 | 2025 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Kimberly-Clark Corp… (KMB) | $18.2B | $17.2B | -5.4% |
| Unilever PLC (UL) | $52.7B | $60.8B | +15.3% |
Kimberly-Clark Corporation's revenue grew from $18.2B (2016) to $17.2B (2025) — a -0.6% CAGR.
Chart 3Net Margin Trend — 10 Years
| Stock | 2016 | 2025 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Kimberly-Clark Corp… (KMB) | 11.9% | 11.7% | -1.4% |
| Unilever PLC (UL) | 9.8% | 9.5% | -3.9% |
Kimberly-Clark Corporation's net margin went from 12% (2016) to 12% (2025).
Chart 4P/E Ratio History — 9 Years
| Stock | 2017 | 2025 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Kimberly-Clark Corp… (KMB) | 18.9 | 16.6 | -12.2% |
| Unilever PLC (UL) | 25.9 | 24.8 | -4.2% |
Kimberly-Clark Corporation has traded in a 17x–28x P/E range over 9 years; current trailing P/E is ~18x. Unilever PLC has traded in a 15x–29x P/E range over 8 years; current trailing P/E is ~27x.
Chart 5EPS Growth — 10 Years
| Stock | 2016 | 2025 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Kimberly-Clark Corp… (KMB) | 5.99 | 6.07 | +1.3% |
| Unilever PLC (UL) | 1.82 | 2.29 | +25.8% |
Kimberly-Clark Corporation's EPS grew from $5.99 (2016) to $6.07 (2025) — a 0% CAGR.
Chart 6Free Cash Flow — 5 Years
Kimberly-Clark Corporation generated $2B FCF in 2025 (-5% vs 2021). Unilever PLC generated $8B FCF in 2024 (+13% vs 2021).
KMB vs UL: Frequently Asked Questions
9 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is KMB or UL a better buy right now?
Kimberly-Clark Corporation (KMB) offers the better valuation at 18.4x trailing P/E (14.7x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Kimberly-Clark Corporation (KMB) a "Hold" — based on 31 analyst ratings — the highest consensus in this comparison. The "better buy" depends entirely on your goals: growth investors should weight revenue trajectory, value investors should weight P/E and PEG, and income investors should weight dividend yield and streak.
02Which has the better valuation — KMB or UL?
On trailing P/E, Kimberly-Clark Corporation (KMB) is the cheapest at 18.4x versus Unilever PLC at 27.3x. On forward P/E, Kimberly-Clark Corporation is actually cheaper at 14.7x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — KMB or UL?
Over the past 5 years, Unilever PLC (UL) delivered a total return of +60.6%, compared to +5.4% for Kimberly-Clark Corporation (KMB). A $10,000 investment in UL five years ago would be worth approximately $16K today (assuming dividends reinvested). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: UL returned +120.1% versus KMB's +19.1%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
04Which is safer — KMB or UL?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Unilever PLC (UL) is the lower-risk stock at 0.03β versus Kimberly-Clark Corporation's 0.04β — meaning KMB is approximately 15% more volatile than UL relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Unilever PLC (UL) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 136% versus 4% for Kimberly-Clark Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which has better profit margins — KMB or UL?
Kimberly-Clark Corporation (KMB) is the more profitable company, earning 11.7% net margin versus 9.5% for Unilever PLC — meaning it keeps 11.7% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: UL leads at 15.5% versus 14.5% for KMB. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — UL leads at 100.0%, reflecting greater pricing power or product mix advantage. Stronger margins indicate durable pricing power, lower cost of revenue, or higher mix of software/services. They are one of the clearest signs of business quality.
06Is KMB or UL more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Kimberly-Clark Corporation (KMB) trades at 14.7x forward P/E versus 19.6x for Unilever PLC — 4.9x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for KMB: 10.4% to $123.00.
07Which pays a better dividend — KMB or UL?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends. Kimberly-Clark Corporation (KMB) offers the highest yield at 4.5%, versus 2.8% for Unilever PLC (UL).
08Is KMB or UL better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Unilever PLC (UL) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.03), 2.8% yield, +120.1% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (UL: +120.1%, KMB: +19.1%), confirming both are viable long-term holds — but the lower-volatility option typically results in less emotional selling during corrections. Retirement portfolios generally favour predictability over maximum returns. Consult a financial advisor before making allocation decisions.
09What are the main differences between KMB and UL?
Both stocks operate in the Consumer Defensive sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both. In terms of investment character: KMB is a mid-cap income-oriented stock; UL is a mid-cap quality compounder stock. These fundamental differences mean investors should not choose between them on a single metric — the "better stock" depends entirely on which of these characteristics aligns with your investment strategy.
Find Stocks Like These
Explore pre-built screens for each stock's profile, or build a custom screen to find stocks that beat both.